Unauthenticated Command Injection
Affects Cacti v1.2.22 when a monitored device uses a specific data source and the poller table holds a default entry with the Cacti server's hostname. Fixed in Cacti 1.2.23 and 1.3.0.
- Published
- Last modified
- Where the record stands: published, rejected by its publisher, or superseded by another id.What do these mean? →
- published
- Whether CISA lists it in its Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog: proof that attackers are using it.What do these mean? →
- Listed in CISA KEV
- How many real-world setups can hit the bug, from the vendor's advisory and CISA data. It does not know your setup.What do these mean? →
- Actively exploited
- Fix
- Fixed in 1.2.23
- Whether working attack code is public (Exploit-DB, Metasploit, Nuclei or GitHub). Public code makes attacks easier.What do these mean? →
- None on Exploit-DB, Metasploit or GitHub
Summary
Cacti, an open source network monitoring and graphing platform, is affected when a specific data source is configured for a monitored device. An unauthenticated attacker can bypass access checks and run arbitrary code on the server hosting Cacti, giving them full control over that system.
Summarized by anthropic/claude-haiku-5.5. Verify details against the original sources.
Read the original description
Cacti is an open source platform which provides a robust and extensible operational monitoring and fault management framework for users. In affected versions a command injection vulnerability allows an unauthenticated user to execute arbitrary code on a server running Cacti, if a specific data source was selected for any monitored device. The vulnerability resides in the `remote_agent.php` file. This file can be accessed without authentication. This function retrieves the IP address of the client via `get_client_addr` and resolves this IP address to the corresponding hostname via `gethostbyaddr`. After this, it is verified that an entry within the `poller` table exists, where the hostname corresponds to the resolved hostname. If such an entry was found, the function returns `true` and the client is authorized. This authorization can be bypassed due to the implementation of the `get_client_addr` function. The function is defined in the file `lib/functions.php` and checks serval `$_SERVER` variables to determine the IP address of the client. The variables beginning with `HTTP_` can be arbitrarily set by an attacker. Since there is a default entry in the `poller` table with the hostname of the server running Cacti, an attacker can bypass the authentication e.g. by providing the header `Forwarded-For: <TARGETIP>`. This way the function `get_client_addr` returns the IP address of the server running Cacti. The following call to `gethostbyaddr` will resolve this IP address to the hostname of the server, which will pass the `poller` hostname check because of the default entry. After the authorization of the `remote_agent.php` file is bypassed, an attacker can trigger different actions. One of these actions is called `polldata`. The called function `poll_for_data` retrieves a few request parameters and loads the corresponding `poller_item` entries from the database. If the `action` of a `poller_item` equals `POLLER_ACTION_SCRIPT_PHP`, the function `proc_open` is used to execute a PHP script. The attacker-controlled parameter `$poller_id` is retrieved via the function `get_nfilter_request_var`, which allows arbitrary strings. This variable is later inserted into the string passed to `proc_open`, which leads to a command injection vulnerability. By e.g. providing the `poller_id=;id` the `id` command is executed. In order to reach the vulnerable call, the attacker must provide a `host_id` and `local_data_id`, where the `action` of the corresponding `poller_item` is set to `POLLER_ACTION_SCRIPT_PHP`. Both of these ids (`host_id` and `local_data_id`) can easily be bruteforced. The only requirement is that a `poller_item` with an `POLLER_ACTION_SCRIPT_PHP` action exists. This is very likely on a productive instance because this action is added by some predefined templates like `Device - Uptime` or `Device - Polling Time`. This command injection vulnerability allows an unauthenticated user to execute arbitrary commands if a `poller_item` with the `action` type `POLLER_ACTION_SCRIPT_PHP` (`2`) is configured. The authorization bypass should be prevented by not allowing an attacker to make `get_client_addr` (file `lib/functions.php`) return an arbitrary IP address. This could be done by not honoring the `HTTP_...` `$_SERVER` variables. If these should be kept for compatibility reasons it should at least be prevented to fake the IP address of the server running Cacti. This vulnerability has been addressed in both the 1.2.x and 1.3.x release branches with `1.2.23` being the first release containing the patch.
Timeline
- CVE published
- Added to CISA KEV
CISA has evidence of exploitation in the wild
- CISA remediation deadline
Due date for US federal agencies to patch
- Record last updated
- EPSS reached 10%
FIRST estimates at least a 10% chance of exploitation in the next 30 days
Affected versions
- Cacti cacti
fixed in 1.2.23
References 4
GitHub · Cacti/cacti
Questions about CVE-2022-46169
What does this mean?
The flaw allows an unauthenticated user to execute arbitrary commands on the server running Cacti, without logging in.Source: github.com
Am I affected, and how do I check?
Cacti v1.2.22 is listed as affected. The issue requires a data source with the POLLER_ACTION_SCRIPT_PHP poller action on a monitored device, and a default poller table entry with the Cacti server's hostname. Check the installed Cacti version and whether any monitored device uses such a data source.Source: github.com
What should I do about it?
Upgrade to Cacti 1.2.23 or 1.3.0, the patched versions. If you cannot upgrade yet, the advisory lists not honoring the HTTP_... $_SERVER variables, or preventing faking of the server's own IP address, as a workaround.Source: github.com
Is it being exploited?
Yes. CISA added it to its Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog on 2023-02-16, which means it has evidence of attacks. No public exploit code is tracked.Source: cisa.gov, cve.now feed data